Wednesday, May 24, 2006

THE GUN REGISTRY

The minister of public safety, Stockwell Day, intends to exempt long fire arms from the the gun registry. The reason for this exemption is that the rural base of the conservative party is against the gun registry because it claims the registration of guns limits the freedom of the rural community whose members are are inveterate hunters. The hunters are ones who get in their cars which are required to have provincial licenses and are able to drive because they have driving permits and go hunting because they have obtained hunting licenses from the provincial authorities and while they drive on public roads, they try to respect the speed limits which are imposed by the provincial roads departments. These people do not consider that the above permits, licenses and speed limits affect their freedom but the registering of guns impedes their liberty.

There is no doubt that the establishment of the gun registry cost an enormous amount of money, but the recent report by the auditor-general claims that the firearm center which runs the registry has made considerable progress and has operational costs under control. The cost of the annual registration of firearms will be 25 million dollars.

The vast majority of the police forces in Canada favour the maintenace of the gun registry for all firearms. These forces consult the registry 6,500 times daily. The police forces claim that the registry is of enormous assistance to them. It allows them to be better prepared for police intervention indicating if firearms are located at a certain address, it allows them to arrest a person who is carrying a firearm that is not registered in his name, and it has a postive affect of reducing the number of murders in this country. The registry has affected the black market sale of illigitimate firearms.

Andrew Coyne, the illiberal columnist of the far right of center National Post, recently wrote that the registry is no longer necessary because the murder rate from firearms in Canada has been reduced from 1500 per annum to 772 per annum. Apparently the loss of 772 lives as a result of the use guns is unimportant to the right wing crowd.

Hunting guns are dangerous weapons. They are used to kill animals and can easily kill human beings. It is normal for a country like Canada to take all the precautions that it deems necessary to save lives. The rural community is against having to register a firearm each time a gun or hunting rifle is purchased, however it is not against the various permits and licenses that are required to go hunting. The current government is trying please its rural base but by doing so, may place the lives of many Canadians in peril.

10 Comments:

At 4:13 AM, Blogger jimbenderindependantoxford said...

I would have to agree that the majority of people who oppose the registry are rural based people.
Long guns still kill, and in fact, the situation in Quebec last fall with the death of a policewoman by an armed and dangerous person(who sadly enough was given permission to keep his guns for hunting season only) shows that long guns are a real nuisance.
Perhaps Michael Moore was right when he stated in "Bowling for Columbine" that perhaps we should make bulletts cost $10,000.00 each,therby isolating the problem by putting them out of reach.
There is no need for guns in homes, cars, back pockets or anything. Yes, abolish poverty and we will solve most crime in our cities.

 
At 6:23 AM, Anonymous WMB said...

The idiots who oppose the gun registry are wannabe Mrkns, who somehow believe that they have the right, under their constitution, to own and use assalt rifles. This is, one day, going to be addressed by the US Supreme Court. Theses people need a National Energy Policy to bring them back to reality.

 
At 8:19 AM, Blogger AC said...

"Andrew Coyne, the illiberal columnist of the far right of center National Post, recently wrote that the registry is no longer necessary because the murder rate from firearms in Canada has been reduced from 1500 per annum to 772 per annum. Apparently the loss of 772 lives as a result of the use guns is unimportant to the right wing crowd."

Don't know who you're mistaking me for, but I never wrote any such thing.

 
At 10:21 AM, Blogger Raging Ranter said...

You haven't demonstrated, nor has anyone else, how the registry will save even one life, let alone 772 lives. As for the assertion that the vast majority of police forces favour the registry, that's a crock of shit. The brass may favour the registry, but the cops on the street know it's uselsss. And since when does a majority opinion of police forces matter when setting policy. The majority of police forces also favour longer sentences for violent criminals, something the Conservatives are persuing. Yet you lefties are against that. Suddenly the views of the police forces don't matter so much do they? Pull your head out of your ass and think a little bit. Even lawyers have to do that once in awhile.

 
At 1:42 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I sometimes don't agree with you (sometimes don't even understand you) but this time you are right on. It is incomprehensible to me why having to register a gun is seen as such an egregious infringement on personal freedom. Freud might have had the answer.

IL

 
At 9:39 PM, Blogger Richard Milhous Martin said...

Its interesting how there is so much of a debate in actually keeping the registry at all. Certainly there have certain benefits to creating and maintaining it, but I believe that we can all agree that they are minimal. Has anyone considered the alternatives to this terribly expensive, time consuming, and misguided effort to control the use and spread of guns? Is it possible to consider that if you took the same planning, effort, cost, media attention, and debate, and put all of that collective effort into a different entity, that perhaps the end result could be much greater? Is it possible that instead of being creative and truly coming up with solutions to a great problem, that this current liberal crowd is made of bandwagon jumpers and people who are afraid to truly think for themselves? Can someone sit down for a minute and consider that despite this exhaustive registry, that people are still dying as a result of guns? You even said it yourself with your arbitrary statistic referring to 772 gun related deaths. Whatever the number truly is, whether guns crimes are increasing or decreasing, this problem still exists within Canada and is not going away. Using an arbitrary stat that gun crimes "are down" is similar to a reigning government taking credit for a good economy and blaming the previous government for a poor economy. It is a convenient stat to prop up an argument that may not actually have any correlation to the issue at hand. The fact is, a giant amount of money is and has been spent on this registry with little result. To be constructive, has anyone considered tighter border security? Hiring and or training of specialized police forces related to gun control? How about tougher sentences for gun crimes? Initiating tighter screening and licensing for owning guns such as raising the age limit for owning guns, tougher certification prior to actually being able to use a firearm, and screening individuals in areas such as criminal and background checks? Has anyone considered better education to youth and teenagers? How about better security at all airports and Canadian ports of entry to better control the spread of ILLEGAL firearms into Canada? Criminals don't fire registered weapons. If someone wants to hurt and destroy they will use any means necessary. Another point, stop conveniently directing your wrath at rural Canadians. You're insulting your own "intelligence" by doing that. You are comparing apples to oranges. Yes, the rural crowd is different from the urban crowd...its like that IN ALL COUNTRIES. And not all of us are raging gun toting "rednecks". I'm not going to quote an arbitrary stat here but I do believe that there is a marked difference in the amount of gun crimes in rural vs. urban areas. Perhaps there is a greater chance of being shot in an urban setting? You might want to check your own stats on that one. Plus, the last time I heard, and it may just be a rumour here, but people are still being admitted to emergency wards in Great Britain with gunshot wounds even though firearms have been outlawed in that part of the world. You're a lawyer, you are certainly a perceptive, critical, creative thinker. Instead of bashing those who are on the opposite end of the spectrum of your way of thinking for looking at alternatives to this registry, why don't you use your skills to come up with some ideas that can actually make a difference in this country? Instead of supporting policies that are highly inefficient and grossly taxing on people resources that expose Chretien and his cohorts for the media whores that they were, do one thing. Think objectively. Stop being a bandwagon driver.

 
At 7:19 PM, Anonymous Smoke said...

Drugs are just bad, you should try to use Herbal Alternatives as a temporary replacement to loose the dependance!

 
At 12:41 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wonderful and informative web site. I used information from that site its great. » »

 
At 10:28 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Where did you find it? Interesting read » »

 
At 5:58 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is very interesting site... » »

 

Post a Comment

<< Home